I've seen photographs of Pope John Paul II kissing the Islamic Holy Book. I was wondering if any Orthodox religious authorities have done so??

It wouldn't be tolerated ,,i have that picture in my photo album on my computer to remind me never to become a roman catholic....i wonder why the roman church didn't condemn what he did,instead of finding excuses for it... or even the lay catholic people didn't rise up to condemn what he did and demand his removal ...upon the death of john paul 11 they should of had a imam officiate at the funeral since he did canonize the quran with a kiss ....in orthodoxy the people would of demanded the removal of a orthodox bishop if one God forbid did some thing like that,...stasko/stanislav

It wouldn't be tolerated ,,i have that picture in my photo album on my computer to remind me never to become a roman catholic....

How very, uh, inspiring. Wouldn't a photo of something reminding you why you want to be Orthodox be better than a reminder why you want to not be something else? We should desire to be Orthodox because we seek God, not because some other choice is worse. Our faith is good and whole and beautiful in and of itself; it doesn't need to be "not-Latin" to be desireable.

Logged

Artillery adds dignity to what would otherwise be a vulgar brawl. ~Frederick the Great

They better not, especially since Islam gnashes its teeth at Christianity so badly. I've read more than a few verses that concern their views on Christians and Jews, and it makes me want to say, "Dude...you guys seriously need to get dates! It would maybe knock off all that religious tension...."

Your original choice of words was a bit too crude. Cleveland, GM

« Last Edit: March 19, 2008, 10:29:34 AM by cleveland »

Logged

*I am no longer posting on OC.net*

We all have a Black Dog and a White Dog inside of us. The One you feed the most eventually eats the Other.

All are tempted, but it is the courageous person who clings to God during the storm. For the Ego is a prison, but Christ is the Liberator

Btw, under Islamic law a non-muslim/kaafir should not touch, let alone kiss, a Quran. At best it is interpreted as a sign of conversion.

I don't think JP II converted, nor should his whole career and life be reduced to one silly act.

As for that computer picture, I agree: a picture of a babushka bowing before an icon lighting her candle would be nice.

Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.A hasty quarrel kindles fire,and urgent strife sheds blood.If you blow on a spark, it will glow;if you spit on it, it will be put out; and both come out of your mouth

I've said this before, and I'll say it again: At most you can say the act was imprudent. Anyone with a brain knows what John Paul II believed about the Catholic and Christian faith. Read Dominus Iesus. Ask what the Muslims think of that. They know what he believes, but they also know his goodwill, and he had that in spades. Sometimes his love and goodwill led him a bit too far (Assisi 1986 is another example). This was a man who personally lived through the most appallingly violent time in human history. He was a man who deeply desired peace. Sometimes, like I said, his gestures went a bit over the top. But it doesn't take away from what a great apostle of peace and understanding John Paul II was.

I agree it was a bad idea. But at the same time, not a huge deal. Kissing is a sign of respect and gratitude. John Paul II did it often. Recall his kissing the tarmac whenever he got off a plane. If I were kissing a Qur'an given to me as a gift, with that kiss I would be expressing gratitude for the gift and respecting the certain elements of truth found within it. It was and is obvious to everyone (including to the cleric who presented it) that John Paul was not personally endorsing Muhammad's supposed revelation as found in that book when he kissed it.

Our Patriarchs of Alexandria just prefer to publicly profess that Mohammed is a Prophet rather than just kissing the Quran. Glass houses...

Would you like to elaborate with some context?

Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.A hasty quarrel kindles fire,and urgent strife sheds blood.If you blow on a spark, it will glow;if you spit on it, it will be put out; and both come out of your mouth

I've said this before, and I'll say it again: At most you can say the act was imprudent. Anyone with a brain knows what John Paul II believed about the Catholic and Christian faith. Read Dominus Iesus. Ask what the Muslims think of that. They know what he believes, but they also know his goodwill, and he had that in spades. Sometimes his love and goodwill led him a bit too far (Assisi 1986 is another example). This was a man who personally lived through the most appallingly violent time in human history. He was a man who deeply desired peace. Sometimes, like I said, his gestures went a bit over the top. But it doesn't take away from what a great apostle of peace and understanding John Paul II was.

I agree it was a bad idea. But at the same time, not a huge deal. Kissing is a sign of respect and gratitude. John Paul II did it often. Recall his kissing the tarmac whenever he got off a plane. If I were kissing a Qur'an given to me as a gift, with that kiss I would be expressing gratitude for the gift and respecting the certain elements of truth found within it. It was and is obvious to everyone (including to the cleric who presented it) that John Paul was not personally endorsing Muhammad's supposed revelation as found in that book when he kissed it.

Now your church knows that no man is infalable including the late pope or the present one or all the past ones....kissing the tarmac is entirely different than the quran...the tarmac doesn't deny or accept the divinty of or not of Christ....the quran deny's the most holy trinity and the divinity of christ there is a big difference about these 2 inanimate objects...stop with all the excuses he was your supreme leader your church chose a infallable man to be the head of you church that turned out to be fallable instead of christ as supreme head.....just like in the old testement around the time of david ,,the children of israel chose a fallable man saul as king and regected the eternal king God allmighty to be there king and supreme head....so the catholic church got what it struggled so hard to have now your stuck with them.....stasko/stanislav

The Latin Church does not teach that the Pope is infallible in every way, but only when he is making statements ex cathedra, which happens very rarely. Granted, it would seem to me that they do tend to cultivate an aura of infallibility surrounding his office, but, AFAIK, the official teaching is more or less as I described it above.

We shall cite first the case of His Beatitude [Parthenios], the Patriarch of Alexandria, who, on at least two occasions, has stated that we Christians ought to recognize Mohammed as a prophet. To this day, however, no one has called for him to step down, and this dreadfully heedless Patriarch continues to preside in the Church of Alexandria as if there were nothing wrong.

As you already know, I'm on the liberal side when it comes to these matters, so it doesn't really bother me in the least... but I don't see the point in lambasting Catholicism for an issue that still appears to be unresolved among the Orthodox.

From this letter of the athonite community:As you already know, I'm on the liberal side when it comes to these matters, so it doesn't really bother me in the least... but I don't see the point in lambasting Catholicism for an issue that still appears to be unresolved among the Orthodox.

Patriarch Parthenios III was also a president of the World Council of Churches - sums up all you need to know.

« Last Edit: March 18, 2008, 03:47:13 AM by Heracleides »

Logged

"And having found Heracleides there again, we instructed him to proclaim the Gospel of God..." ~Acts of Barnabas

From this letter of the athonite community:As you already know, I'm on the liberal side when it comes to these matters, so it doesn't really bother me in the least... but I don't see the point in lambasting Catholicism for an issue that still appears to be unresolved among the Orthodox.

What issue would that be? Muhammad is not a prophet like Moses, period. No discussion among the Orthodox on that.

I have heard the worshippers of Athos state that the non-Chalcedonians canonized Eutyches. They, in fact, anathematized him (belatedly, I admit, but then they were ahead of us in condemning the Three Chapters).

I would rather have an attributed quote, rather than a second hand accusation.

Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.A hasty quarrel kindles fire,and urgent strife sheds blood.If you blow on a spark, it will glow;if you spit on it, it will be put out; and both come out of your mouth

Pope Blessed John XXIII and Pope John Paul II (eternal memory) both personally celebrated the Divine Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom with the Melkites and Ukrainians, respectively. Blessed John XXIII wore Byzantine vestments using the papal tiara as his mitre. Pope John Paul II wore Latin vestments. Popes will also attend Eastern Liturgies and preside from the choir while others celebrate. A picture of Pope John Paul II celebrating is at this site:

here's one your infallible pope's here in this picture you can have him and them....pope at his finest....sad ,,,i wonder if he went to Muslim heaven and has 72 hourises,,,МИР БОЖИЈИ to all the Orthodox christians...ХРИСТОС ВОСКРЕСЕ....ВОИСТИНУ ВОСКРЕСЕ.........

here's one you infallible pope here in this picture you can have him....pope at his finest....sad ,,,i wonder if he went to Muslim heaven and has 72 hourises,,,МИР БОЖИЈИ to all the Orthodox christians...ХРИСТОС ВОСКРЕСЕ....ВОИСТИНУ ВОСКРЕСЕ.........

I don't deny that Pope John Paul kissing the Quran possibly sets a bad precedent. But really, is this slap against the good father's memory necessary?

Well, he did kiss the Qu'ran.How many Martyrs chose torture and death rather than bow to false idols?

I agree with brother George martyrdom is preferred than to deny The Most Holy Trinity....Our Great Lord And God..as orthodox Christians we have to take a stand in what we believe..and not trying to be politically correct in not trying to offend and pertending your alright and im alright...God's Peace..Christ Has Risen....

Isn't the ecumenical patriarch courting the heretics know praying with them and the late heretic when he was alive,,,Of course we have to care....Christ Has Risen......

When His All Holiness kisses a statue of the Immaculate Conception, or recites the Creed with the filioque, I'll worry then. Cordial relations between people of different faith are fine, and they can meet on common ground. I have several Muslim friends whom I hold very dear, but I would never kiss their Qurans. I was going camping with an Iraqi Muslim friend some years ago, and we were leaving from his house, and when we got to the doorstep, he held the Quran up for me to walk under it three times as is the Muslim custom on embarking on a journey. I got out my pocket New Testament and held it up saying: "Will you pass under this and submit yourself to Christ as God?" He smilingly declined and said "I understand" and held the Quran up for himself to walk under and kiss, and put it away.

Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.

Brother George didn't the pope cross himself like the orthodox,,and the ecumenical patriarch like the latins and didn't they recite the pope the orthodox creed and the ecumenical patriarch the latin creed.....i could be mistaken on the creed recital thought......Christ has Risen.....

Brother George didn't the pope cross himself like the orthodox,,and the ecumenical patriarch like the latins

I think if the Pope had crossed himself with three fingers, people may actually have taken it as an insult and phoney. Don't forget, the Orthodox have crossed themselves in different ways over the centuries (and the Old Believers still do), as have the Roman Catholics. There is only a customary way for an Eastern Orthodox Christian to Cross themselves- what should those Orthodox Christians whose fingers have been amputated do? Should they not Cross themselves as best they can? The Cross must be respected wherever it appears- even if it is on the wall of the most heretical sect's church, it is still the Cross.

Brother George in the serbian church there is one parishioner who doesn't have a right arm ,,,he crosses him self with his left,,he uses what he has

What an inspiration! I once watched a running race among people with disabilities, and one of the athletes' artificial leg fell off and he fell to the ground, but he just got up on his one leg, picked up his artificial limb, and hopped the rest of the race. He came last, but he finished the race. The same goes for us, it doesn't matter if we come last, provided we finish the race, and this sometimes means carrying our own personal handicaps.

« Last Edit: May 15, 2008, 08:53:26 AM by ozgeorge »

Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.

here's one your infallible pope's here in this picture you can have him and them....pope at his finest....sad ,,,i wonder if he went to Muslim heaven and has 72 hourises,,,МИР БОЖИЈИ to all the Orthodox christians...ХРИСТОС ВОСКРЕСЕ....ВОИСТИНУ ВОСКРЕСЕ.........

Well, if mocking the deceased John Paul II with talk of his partaking of 72 virgins with Muslims in the afterlife and (on another post) calling on terrorists to destroy the Vatican are considered acceptable comments by the OC.net moderators, I wish no longer to participate in OC.net.

Well, if mocking the deceased John Paul II with talk of his partaking of 72 virgins with Muslims in the afterlife and (on another post) calling on terrorists to destroy the Vatican are considered acceptable comments by the OC.net moderators, I wish no longer to participate in OC.net.

Is or is not Pope John Paul II kissing the Qur'an in this photograph, a book which explicitly denies the Holy Trinity (Qur‘an, 4:171) and the Divinity of Christ (Qur‘an, 5:116)?

Stasko's point is that this is a clear sign of a denial of Christ and acceptance of Muslim teachings. If you disagree then you are free to respond.

As for the other point, stasko also called for the destruction of the Oecumenical Patriarchate (my Bishop) in the same post. That's fine. That's his opinion. I disagree, and I've told him so. And he didn't actually say "terrorists"- you did. In which case, you could say that Constantinople also fell to "terrorists"- which is quite ludicrous.

« Last Edit: May 15, 2008, 09:55:28 AM by ozgeorge »

Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.

I agree with brother George martyrdom is preferred than to deny The Most Holy Trinity....Our Great Lord And God..as orthodox Christians we have to take a stand in what we believe..and not trying to be politically correct in not trying to offend and pertending your alright and im alright...God's Peace..Christ Has Risen....

This is the main point in my opinion.

The 'act' was cowardess and put to shame those who died rather than bow down to things that are not of God and dny the true Christ. The suffering of our martyrs and saints is the root of the true faith. WE are ALL obligated to hold onto our integrity and resist todays "Liberalism" which on the surface seems very good but it is not Christian. Christians can not be all things to all people. WE are 'Christians' all the time and to all people and in all situations

The Quran is not of God...it is blasphemy from start to finish.

Our late father Pope John Paul II I feel sure asked God for forgiveness for this mishap in his own quiet space. It was to him I believe a very low point of his long and beautiful stewardship of the Roman Catholic Church and its mission throughout the world. He cared for and loved the people. He was well loved.

As for the other point, stasko also called for the destruction of the Oecumenical Patriarchate (my Bishop) in the same post. That's fine. That's his opinion. I disagree, and I've told him so. And he didn't actually say "terrorists"- you did. In which case, you could say that Constantinople also fell to "terrorists"- which is quite ludicrous.

I pray to God that the moslem majority in rome succeeds in the vatican's total destruction the place were they plotted our destruction

Who exactly in this "Muslim majority in Rome" would plot the Vatican's "total destruction"? Could they be terrorists?

As for your intimation that John Paul II was a Muslim, that is beyond the pale.

I never disputed that it was a mistake. It most certainly was, but if John Paul was doing what the photo appears to show (not completely certain, as it is a photo floating around the Internet without context), and if he knew what that gift was, it is still clear from his entire ministry that he believes in the universal salvific role of Jesus Christ. Remember Dominus Iesus? Knowing his background in the horrors of Eastern Europe in the middle part of the 20th century (something NONE of us could ever understand), John Paul was sometimes a little overeager about gestures of peace and goodwill.

Even though a mistake, it was a momentary mistake. He could hardly have premeditated it. How a misguided but momentary gesture of respect in a lifetime of great holiness and ministry and charity could justify mocking the deceased with talk of fornicating with 72 virgins and (you) making intimations that John Paul outed himself as a Muslim, I do not know.

I cannot believe such anti-Catholic bigotry goes unwarned on OC.net. Yet I remain saddled with a warning for what was a trifle. I've lost my last shred of confidence in OC.net moderation.

Is this what passes for Christian charity on OC.net? I've been here a while and enjoyed it here, but this may be the last straw.

I completely agree with Amdetsion and support his kind post. I must also agree with Lubeltri that Ozgeorge is not consistent with his moderation and seems to have a bone to pick with you especially. One must admit that the late Pope John Paul II was a good man and tried his best to guide his Church. It is unfortunate that he made the mistake of kissing the Quran...only our Lord and Savior is able to judge a man and his intent. Of course we should uphold our beliefs as Christians but we are also called to treat others with kindness and mercy.

I must also agree with Lubeltri that Ozgeorge is not consistent with his moderation and seems to have a bone to pick with you especially.

If you observe a problem with the moderation that you believe merits attention, please report the post in question so that the appropriate global moderator or Fr. Chris may address the situation. Calling out the moderator in public is both in poor taste and an ineffective method of resolving problems.Veniamin, FFA Moderator

Logged

Artillery adds dignity to what would otherwise be a vulgar brawl. ~Frederick the Great

Pardon my indiscretion. I was not trying to embarrass Ozgeorge,,,only emphasizing what seems to be obvious to all of us who read the posts with banter between the two in questions. I will now make sure to go through the corrrect channels. However I will also say that calling out the Late Pope, imho is most certainly in poor taste!

Well, if mocking the deceased John Paul II with talk of his partaking of 72 virgins with Muslims in the afterlife and (on another post) calling on terrorists to destroy the Vatican are considered acceptable comments by the OC.net moderators, I wish no longer to participate in OC.net.

Vatican tried many many times thru history to divide[fragment] and absorb or destroy the Holy Orthodox Church in what ever country it was in From Serbia. ukrainia Russia..Romainia,,,Ethiopia,,Egypt,Jerusalem,Bosnia,,,India....and other places,some with bribes,other by the Jesuits,masquerading as orthodox clergy or by military force..............world war 11 croatia/bosnia....when my own mother and dad were being herded in bosnia with other's like cattle,the one's that wern't massacred were packed like sardines into cattle train car's for a trip to germany for the forced labor work camps thousands of people died in the standing position on those trains they were packed so tight,,the croatians would taunt them by saying any body that crosses them self's with three fingers and right to left and didn't accept the pope that person should be killed and buried 6 meters....now you know why i don't care for the pope's or the vatican with its plotting and schemes it's hunger for power that's never satisfied history itself bears witness.....What the Vatican has sowed may it allso reap it's own destruction.....God's Peace .....Christ Has Risen....Tuly He Has Risen.........other orthodox faithful from different country's also. have there own vatican horror story's......

Vatican tried many many times thru history to divide[fragment] and absorb or destroy the Holy Orthodox Church in what ever country it was in From Serbia. ukrainia Russia..Romainia,,,Ethiopia,,Egypt,Jerusalem,Bosnia,,,India....and other places,some with bribes,other by the Jesuits,masquerading as orthodox clergy or by military force..............world war 11 croatia/bosnia....when my own mother and dad were being herded in bosnia with other's like cattle,the one's that wern't massacred were packed like sardines into cattle train car's for a trip to germany for the forced labor work camps thousands of people died in the standing position on those trains they were packed so tight,,the croatians would taunt them by saying any body that crosses them self's with three fingers and right to left and didn't accept the pope that person should be killed and buried 6 meters....now you know why i don't care for the pope's or the vatican with its plotting and schemes it's hunger for power that's never satisfied history itself bears witness.....What the Vatican has sowed may it allso reap it's own destruction.....God's Peace .....Christ Has Risen....Tuly He Has Risen.........other orthodox faithful from different country's also. have there own vatican horror story's......

The Catholic Church is also responsible for virtually the entire salvation of the Western cultural legacy, brought western education to the poor in India and South America, stopped human sacrifice in Mexico, etc etc etc.

Every Church has good and bad. The papacy did bad things, the papacy did good things. Because I live in American in 2008, the politics of the past is irrelevant to me; what I care about is that the Pope is a heretic and has done heretical things like promoting "interfaith dialogue" and has not returned to Orthodoxy.

The experiences your family went through on the other hand were horrible and it is because of that that these issues matter to you more. That is understandable. But we cannot attribute collective guilt to people. John Paul II was not the same as any Croatian WWII militia commander or priest associated with them. He was a great man who virtually ended communism in Eastern Europe. So my request to you is to to focus on the facts and not attack him and ask questions like "is he in the Muslim heaven with the 72 virgins" which is extremely insulting to our Roman Catholic posters here when that has nothing to do with this discussion. You can attack the heresies of the Pope without insulting the character of John Paul II who was overall a very good man who made the world a better place.

Vatican tried many many times thru history to divide[fragment] and absorb or destroy the Holy Orthodox Church in what ever country it was in From Serbia. ukrainia Russia..Romainia,,,Ethiopia,,Egypt,Jerusalem,Bosnia,,,India....and other places,some with bribes,other by the Jesuits,masquerading as orthodox clergy or by military force..............world war 11 croatia/bosnia....when my own mother and dad were being herded in bosnia with other's like cattle,the one's that wern't massacred were packed like sardines into cattle train car's for a trip to germany for the forced labor work camps thousands of people died in the standing position on those trains they were packed so tight,,the croatians would taunt them by saying any body that crosses them self's with three fingers and right to left and didn't accept the pope that person should be killed and buried 6 meters....now you know why i don't care for the pope's or the vatican with its plotting and schemes it's hunger for power that's never satisfied history itself bears witness.....What the Vatican has sowed may it allso reap it's own destruction.....God's Peace .....Christ Has Risen....Tuly He Has Risen.........other orthodox faithful from different country's also. have there own vatican horror story's......

I am sorry stashko for the atrocities you mentioned. I know its is not 'my' fault specifically but as a servant of the church I want to immediately extend to you my regret and deep remorse for the suffering that your people endured (are enduring).

God bless the souls of those who lost there lives at the hands of the merciless and the Godless.

The loss you point out is a shock to me. It caused me great sadness.

I was going to post a few atrocities heaped onto my people in Ethiopia and various areas of my beloved African motherland which of course includes Egypt. But after reading your post I have lost my interest in pointing out what is my own record of "Roman Catholic backed suffering" for this thread. I am compelled to instead beg you and others to resist recanting the horrors of a fallen period which in due time will be judged by the Lord; but instead find forgiveness in our hearts.

Is forgiveness the goal?

I beg you all to persue it; even for your own sakes and the sake of your children as well as for the sake of those who have already sufferred and lost there lives. Let that suffering be met with true forgiveness so that the death and suffering of our loved ones is not in vain. Bitterness and a hard heart will not prepare us for the Kingdom that Christ is preparing.

Crying (that is to also pray for) deeply for the suffering of others will help to encourge humility in each of us even if or while we yet still suffer. This is the healing we need for ourselves which is in Gods Love which or Lord and Savior Jesus Christ Taught us.

I know this post is not fun or glib and is not a targeted attack out our reposed holy father Pope John Paul II. But after reading this I pray that each of us pray for the faults and sins of our persecutors that God forgive them there sins and that we also pray for each other that we may soon heal from the wounds we have been given.

The collection of prayers, songs and writtings of African slaves in America is a daugnting record of utter hopelessness and despair heaped onto a people by a people who claimed Christ as their savior for over 400 years.

I mention this because I think reading it will help you, me and others to learn 'true' forgiveness that Christ teaches. This forgiveness is not to be confused with satans' "forgive but don't forget" kind of "forgiveness" that we all currently enjoy. Forgiving and not forgetting is wickedness; pure and uncut. 'True' forgiveness is very painful to people like us. It dos not feel good.

But it is good.

The slaves in American to my tear filled shock blessed there persecutors 'deeply' even died for them. How do you die for somebody who is happily killing you and your children at the same time?

I do not know....

But I want to know what this kind of 'mind' is about. This would be the key to true humility which is at the root of true forgiveness.

Seems somehow the pain of cruelty and death had NO POWER over the African slave in America. It did not torcher his mind or consume his soul. It had no power over him at all it seems.

I do not have (or have but not using) that power they had and niether do you seeing the post you placed on this thread and we are free men in our day and age.

Somehow, I think we may need to take some cultural differences into account in our analysis of and response to stashko's words. Speaking Serbian as his native language, and English only as a second language, does the word "hourises" express the same meaning to stashko as it communicates to us? Is the concept the same?

Yes, I know the idea of the "72 virgins" that "hourises" seems to entail is quite crass and insulting to our cultural sensibilities, and stashko would do well to be much more aware of this. But maybe this level of innuendo isn't quite what stashko wanted to convey, so maybe we shouldn't be so quick to jump on him and say that he needs a warning for blatantly insulting Roman Catholics. Can we so accurately attribute to him the level of intent necessary for such harsh judgment?

Dear Father Deacon....Bless...He the pope didn't end communisim in the east as the catholic church claim's...communisim eventuliy died on it's own russia couldn't mantain the iron curtain countries it was very expensive for them to keep them so they released them ,,russia it self was suffering severly financially..it's like catholic giving credit to that fatima/ Lourdes phony apparition that supposedly lberated the eastern block country's due to her imaculate heart....such nonsence....like that phony apparition wasn't aware that the orthodox church and faithful honored the Most Holy Mother greatly...... Father Deacon ,,,since the catholic pope is the supreme head of the catholic Church and not Christ and the catholic's preach the pope more than christ....For them he is a supreme Shepherd ,,By kissing the quran he actully did canonized it,, he either was insane or senile..what reward will he get for it but the musilm heaven and all the thing's that go with it.... Serbia ,bosnia, croatia,slovania,macadonia mountain negro..weren't part of the iron curtain countrys they seperated from russia in the 50 i believe..they had a form of communisim that didn't have sever restrictions a more relaxed version were people can travel anywhere they wanted.......with out being shot......when communisim still ruled in the Balkans we had a sister that was taken from our mother in the second war by croatian ustasa put in a orphanage with other serbian children they were going to set the orphanage on fire ,,a religious saved them scattered them among the croatian family's she survived raised by them ..when communisim ruled the balkan she was allowed to visit us here in the states for six months..then she went back to osjek croatia were she lived and died...... Father Deacon it's not easy to forgive ....i know i eventually have to forgive...God's Peace........Christ Has Risen....

I must also agree with Lubeltri that Ozgeorge is not consistent with his moderation and seems to have a bone to pick with you especially.

Juliana,I think transparency is a good thing, so you should know that in fact the Moderators talk amongst themselves whenever an issue comes up about the best way to deal with the situation. Just because a moderator enacts the consensus decision of the Moderator Team does not mean that they alone are responsible for taking the decision. I know that it can appear this way on the "outside" but rest assured that this is not the case. I can understand how you might have made this mistake based on what you are able to see, but there is a Moderators Forum which you are not able to see.So whenever you see a moderator working, just be aware that they are working as part of a team, and not an individual. This will help you to avoid jumping to the conclusion that their actions are a personal vendetta.George

Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.

With all due respect - a Deacon cannot give any blessing until he's ordained to the priesthood unless it is custom for Serbian Orthodox to ask their Deacons for a Blessing. In that case, I apologize for my ignorance.

The collection of prayers, songs and writtings of African slaves in America is a daugnting record of utter hopelessness and despair heaped onto a people by a people who claimed Christ as their savior for over 400 years.

I mention this because I think reading it will help you, me and others to learn 'true' forgiveness that Christ teaches. This forgiveness is not to be confused with satans' "forgive but don't forget" kind of "forgiveness" that we all currently enjoy. Forgiving and not forgetting is wickedness; pure and uncut. 'True' forgiveness is very painful to people like us. It dos not feel good.

But it is good.

The slaves in American to my tear filled shock blessed there persecutors 'deeply' even died for them. How do you die for somebody who is happily killing you and your children at the same time?

I do not know....

But I want to know what this kind of 'mind' is about. This would be the key to true humility which is at the root of true forgiveness.

Seems somehow the pain of cruelty and death had NO POWER over the African slave in America. It did not torcher his mind or consume his soul. It had no power over him at all it seems.

I do not have (or have but not using) that power they had and niether do you seeing the post you placed on this thread and we are free men in our day and age.

Free?

I hope you get a chance to read The Slave Narratives.

Peace.

Christ has Risen!

Dear Father Deacon Amdetsion Bless i will look for that book...I really do realise that i have to forgive but not Forget....it's so sad that people do so much evil to each other ,,even some so called religious....God Help us all....God's Peace .....to you...and ....Christ Has Risen.....

Somehow, I think we may need to take some cultural differences into account in our analysis of and response to stashko's words. Speaking Serbian as his native language, and English only as a second language, does the word "hourises" express the same meaning to stashko as it communicates to us? Is the concept the same?

Yes, I know the idea of the "72 virgins" that "hourises" seems to entail is quite crass and insulting to our cultural sensibilities, and stashko would do well to be much more aware of this. But maybe this level of innuendo isn't quite what stashko wanted to convey, so maybe we shouldn't be so quick to jump on him and say that he needs a warning for blatantly insulting Roman Catholics. Can we so accurately attribute to him the level of intent necessary for such harsh judgment?

Serbs are perceived to have two enemies - Catholics (Ustasha) and Muslims (former Ottoman Empire & today's Kosovo Albanians). We know what happened in 1389 in Kosovo. Seeing the Pope of Rome kiss the Koran only fuels their fire that both enemies are one and the same regardless of religion and nationality.I feel that stashko's words portrayed frustration rather than a deliberate attempt to insult Catholics.I see stashko's words as a reminder of the temporality of the papacy and the betrayal of celibacy by those Catholic priests who engaged in pederasty.

With all due respect - a Deacon cannot give any blessing until he's ordained to the priesthood unless it is custom for Serbian Orthodox to ask their Deacons for a Blessing. In that case, I apologize for my ignorance.

But i believe they can say God Bless you...they are a ordained holy order in the church.....there not considered lay people .....God's Peace...Xpictoc Bockrece.......

But i believe they can say God Bless you...they are a ordained holy order in the church.....there not considered lay people .....God's Peace...Xpictoc Bockrece.......

A Deacon is considered the ultimate lay person, while they are ordained, their function is to assist Priests and other clergy. A Deacon will not allow one to kiss his hand.You and I can tell each other "God Bless You" - if a Deacon does so, he is technically acting no differently than we are.

A Deacon is considered the ultimate lay person, while they are ordained, their function is to assist Priests and other clergy. A Deacon will not allow one to kiss his hand.You and I can tell each other "God Bless You" - if a Deacon does so, he is technically acting no differently than we are.

Good point.

Please note that though the above is right; in the Ethiopian Orthodox and the Coptic Orthodox Churches the rank of deacon has two levels (after 'Reader') Sub-Deacon and Archdeacon. They are both 'deacons' and are refered to as "Deacons". However; the archdeacon is not refered to as 'deacon' but is always called "archdeacon" in the event that he is apointed to work directly under an archbishop. This is done so that when an "archdeacon' is around people are aware from his use of the title that he is the right hand of the bishop and is recieved as such. This is a matter of protocal. All archdeacons whether called deacon or archdeacon all have the same rank.

These two ranks are not considerd "ultimate lay person" at all. Men with these ranks are clergyman. Archdeacons are likened more to a sub-priest so tom speak. The archdeacon wheres a crown during all services and administers the Holy blood of Christ during communion. Deacon is barely distinguisheable from priest except for the lack of a head cover after service the deacon is in a black robe with a large neck cross.

A Deacon is considered the ultimate lay person, while they are ordained, their function is to assist Priests and other clergy. A Deacon will not allow one to kiss his hand.You and I can tell each other "God Bless You" - if a Deacon does so, he is technically acting no differently than we are.

A deacon is ordained to the first degree of the priesthood, and often people will kiss his hand right after he has celebrated because like a priest, he has touched the Eucharist (and consumed the chalice). He is called Father. His funeral is similar to a layman's, although he is buried with his censor.

Amdetsion & Deacon Anastasios - thanks for the explanations and I have a better understanding even though I saw the Deacon as "ultimate lay person" designation somewhere in the OC.net forum. While people can kiss the Deacon's hand immediately after receiving the Eucharist, from my experience, a Deacon under the Moscow Patriarchate would not allow me to kiss his hand when I met him at a church festival. I suppose I didn't know any better at the time.

Other Orthodox jurisdictions (Antiochian and OCA come to mind) have sub-deacons as well. I have not heard of Archdeacon in the GOA.

Amdetsion & Deacon Anastasios - thanks for the explanations and I have a better understanding even though I saw the Deacon as "ultimate lay person" designation somewhere in the OC.net forum. While people can kiss the Deacon's hand immediately after receiving the Eucharist, from my experience, a Deacon under the Moscow Patriarchate would not allow me to kiss his hand when I met him at a church festival. I suppose I didn't know any better at the time.

Other Orthodox jurisdictions (Antiochian and OCA come to mind) have sub-deacons as well. I have not heard of Archdeacon in the GOA.

I've said this before, and I'll say it again: At most you can say the act was imprudent. Anyone with a brain knows what John Paul II believed about the Catholic and Christian faith. Read Dominus Iesus. Ask what the Muslims think of that. They know what he believes, but they also know his goodwill, and he had that in spades. Sometimes his love and goodwill led him a bit too far (Assisi 1986 is another example). This was a man who personally lived through the most appallingly violent time in human history. He was a man who deeply desired peace. Sometimes, like I said, his gestures went a bit over the top. But it doesn't take away from what a great apostle of peace and understanding John Paul II was.

I agree it was a bad idea. But at the same time, not a huge deal. Kissing is a sign of respect and gratitude. John Paul II did it often. Recall his kissing the tarmac whenever he got off a plane. If I were kissing a Qur'an given to me as a gift, with that kiss I would be expressing gratitude for the gift and respecting the certain elements of truth found within it. It was and is obvious to everyone (including to the cleric who presented it) that John Paul was not personally endorsing Muhammad's supposed revelation as found in that book when he kissed it.

« May Saint John Baptist protect Islam and all the people of Jordan! »

Only to enslave us, rape us and use us as slaves at labour plantations and destroy nearly every element of our pre-Columbian history and culture...

Back on topic, is it really that big of a deal when we take into consideration the fact that our Ecumenical Patriarchate prays with heretics and that certain Orthodox Churches officially participate in the Ecumenical Movement which is built upon the heretical notion that there are more than one Churches with the intention of creating a new "universal Church" even though WE ARE the universal, only one true Church?

Only to enslave us, rape us and use us as slaves at labour plantations

You were very bad slaves, didn't work hard enough (is this where the lazy mexican stereotype comes from?). At least we Dutchmen made a lot of money in the transatlantic slave trade that followed, so consider this a belated thank you.

« Last Edit: November 30, 2012, 02:34:45 PM by Cyrillic »

Logged

"Who wants to be consistent? The dullard and the doctrinaire, the tedious people who carry out their principles to the bitter end of action, to the reductio ad absurdum of practice. Not I."-Oscar Wilde, The Decay of Lying

Nothing wrong with venerating the book that is personally responsible for the martyrdom of millions of us throughout history

Personally, I'd RATHER the Pope receive the Hindu Shiva mark and venerate pagan and/or tribal artifacts opposed to the Qur'an, at least those things do not explicitly reject Christ and have not explicitly lead to the deaths of millions of us.

On an entirely different note, I'd rather be an Aztec neo-pagan anyday like my ancestors opposed to accepting colonialism and being a Roman Catholic.

ecumenism...the aim of unity among all Christian churches throughout the world

Some consider Islam to be a Christian heresy, in which case, ecumenism would apply here to the Pope's action, he is trying to unite Muslims to the Roman Catholic faith through showing respect to their Holy Book the Qur'an which is purely evil.

Ecumenism is built on heresy. Just from that definition alone, it assumes that there is more than one Christian Church throughout the world, but in the Nicean Creed and in standard Orthodox doctrine, we profess that there is only ONE Church. There is NO SUCH THING as "your Church and my Church" or "this Church and that Church" but there is only ONE Church and everything else is not a Church but a house of schismatics and heretics.

Honestly, a professing Christian kissing a book that denies the divinity of Christ? Wow. I say let heretics kiss what they want. What do we have to do with the pope anyway?

A gentle bow and a hand shake would have been more appropriate. But, the KISS means something more than a plain thank you. I think if the pope had to do this over Im sure he would have done it differently.

And since the incident in question happened at least 25 years ago and said Pope has died, not sure what anyone thinks can be done about it now.

And as I said on a Catholic board a long time ago - is it possible he just screwed up? I too think it was a stupid thing to do ... maybe even a sin. Well, I'm a sinner too and I can think of plenty worse things I've kissed in my life than a Koran.

Logged

"Sometimes, you just gotta say, 'OK, I still have nine live, two-headed animals' and move on.'' (owner of Coney Island freak show, upon learning he'd been outbid on a 5-legged puppy)

Only to enslave us, rape us and use us as slaves at labour plantations and destroy nearly every element of our pre-Columbian history and culture...

Actually, no. For a while Nahuatl was the official language of New Spain (at least for the Amerindians), and the language of the seminary for missionaries in Mexico.

but there was enslaving and raping. And the human sacrifice did stop.

« Last Edit: December 03, 2012, 11:15:58 AM by ialmisry »

Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.A hasty quarrel kindles fire,and urgent strife sheds blood.If you blow on a spark, it will glow;if you spit on it, it will be put out; and both come out of your mouth

And since the incident in question happened at least 25 years ago and said Pope has died, not sure what anyone thinks can be done about it now.

And as I said on a Catholic board a long time ago - is it possible he just screwed up? I too think it was a stupid thing to do ... maybe even a sin. Well, I'm a sinner too and I can think of plenty worse things I've kissed in my life than a Koran.

There is also the fact that he probably had to be diplomatic, considering he was in public, and when you pick up one of those books, that is what you do with it. (If they give you one while you're visiting a mosque or something.)

« Last Edit: December 03, 2012, 07:49:43 PM by biro »

Logged

He will come again with glory to judge the living and the dead. His kingdom will have no end.

Definition 2. It's what you see in several ecumenism events. The Pope venerating the Koran, the pope getting Shiva Marks, EO holding services with many pagan "clergy" present.

As real as your definition of "original Christianity".

Brother God Bless you.

If I get under you skin or cause you any distress or annoyance (or both), then I am sorry. Please forgive me.

Please understand, Ecumenism crushed my belief of somewhere between 26-32 years in the EO church. (Longer than many on this forum have been alive) I view issues such as the Pope venerating the Koran as such, and fits the definition of Ecumenism to many Eastern Orthodox Christians... Including the video I posted about the issue made by the Synod in Resistance.

I view issues such as the Pope venerating the Koran as such, and fits the definition of Ecumenism to many Eastern Orthodox Christians... Including the video I posted about the issue made by the Synod in Resistance.

That means you all need to buy some dictionaries ASAP. I can call my cat Dog and my dog - Cat but that won't make any sense.

I view issues such as the Pope venerating the Koran as such, and fits the definition of Ecumenism to many Eastern Orthodox Christians... Including the video I posted about the issue made by the Synod in Resistance.

That means you all need to buy some dictionaries ASAP. I can call my cat Dog and my dog - Cat but that won't make any sense.

Isn't it basic Christian charity to give people the benefit of the doubt whenever possible?

Also, to reiterate my earlier question, what exactly can the LATE John Paul II do to rectify the situation now? And is it at all conceivable that God might have forgiven him for it, given that God is notoriously more forgiving than most humans? (Don't we all hope that for ourselves, anyway?)

Logged

"Sometimes, you just gotta say, 'OK, I still have nine live, two-headed animals' and move on.'' (owner of Coney Island freak show, upon learning he'd been outbid on a 5-legged puppy)

Isn't it basic Christian charity to give people the benefit of the doubt whenever possible?

Also, to reiterate my earlier question, what exactly can the LATE John Paul II do to rectify the situation now? And is it at all conceivable that God might have forgiven him for it, given that God is notoriously more forgiving than most humans? (Don't we all hope that for ourselves, anyway?)

I could not accept veneration in that respect towards a heresy. HOWEVER, I could accept if it was an accident (infallible? LOL) on his behalf. Being in huge crowds and somebody walks up to him with something he thought was a "big bible" and kissed it.

Why should Orthodox discuss this? Because there are undoubtedly Orthodox leaders who secretly (or not) think the Pope's actions were the right course. Now is the time to discuss and pre-empt such attempts at blasphemy in our own Church.

Wow. To me this is more troubling than kissing the Koran. We want the Forerunner to make people Christians, not protect their false religion.

There is right and wrong diplomacy when it comes to adversaries.

The Pope, I'm sure, thought he was being diplomatic and generous to show that he was a good guy. But when St. Paul said he became all things to all men, this isn't what he had in mind. You don't call down blessings upon false religions, participate in their rites, and venerate their sacred objects for the sake of appearances.

The right way is to act like a Christian. Be good to those who persecute you. Be respectful. But for Peter's sake, don't ask the Forerunner to protect Islam. My goodness.

Not that it matters what I think about a departed Pope of the Catholic Church, but one time is a mistake. This is a bad habit at best, but I find it hard to extend even that much benefit when you consider how much time and planning goes into these kinds of meetings and events. You don't just accidentally get anointed by a Hindu who you are holding an audience with, or mistakenly ask the Forerunner's protection in a prepared speech.

This is what salt losing its saltiness looks like. More concerned about garnering favor than standing for the truth. I think people have more respect for those who stand for something than those who fall for everything.

Isn't it basic Christian charity to give people the benefit of the doubt whenever possible?

Also, to reiterate my earlier question, what exactly can the LATE John Paul II do to rectify the situation now? And is it at all conceivable that God might have forgiven him for it, given that God is notoriously more forgiving than most humans? (Don't we all hope that for ourselves, anyway?)

Not to mention that most people on this board aren't Roman Catholics in the first place.

That never stopped them from throwing a good hissy fit, though.

Logged

He will come again with glory to judge the living and the dead. His kingdom will have no end.

Also, to reiterate my earlier question, what exactly can the LATE John Paul II do to rectify the situation now? And is it at all conceivable that God might have forgiven him for it, given that God is notoriously more forgiving than most humans? (Don't we all hope that for ourselves, anyway?)

Not to mention that most people on this board aren't Roman Catholics in the first place.

That never stopped them from throwing a good hissy fit, though.

Because sometimes it's a person's role in life to serve as a warning to others.

In a church as large as ours, there are undoubtedly Orthodox leaders who think the Pope's actions were the right course. Now is the time to discuss and pre-empt such attempts at blasphemy in our own Church. The laity must make their displeasure known before it happens so nobody in the hierarchy gets any funny ideas to try it themselves.

Also, to reiterate my earlier question, what exactly can the LATE John Paul II do to rectify the situation now? And is it at all conceivable that God might have forgiven him for it, given that God is notoriously more forgiving than most humans? (Don't we all hope that for ourselves, anyway?)

Not to mention that most people on this board aren't Roman Catholics in the first place.

That never stopped them from throwing a good hissy fit, though.

Because sometimes it's a person's role in life to serve as a warning to others.

In a church as large as ours, there are undoubtedly Orthodox leaders who think the Pope's actions were the right course. Now is the time to discuss and pre-empt such attempts at blasphemy in our own Church. The laity must make their displeasure known before it happens so nobody in the hierarchy gets any funny ideas to try it themselves.

Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.A hasty quarrel kindles fire,and urgent strife sheds blood.If you blow on a spark, it will glow;if you spit on it, it will be put out; and both come out of your mouth

All I know is that from the moment JPII took office, he was blasted from both right and left. The left called him "rigid" and "reactionary"and while the right called him ... exactly the opposite! And they always trotted out the Koran-kissing episode to prove their point. Which is why it might be a good idea to take the whole thing with a huge grain of Celtic sea salt.

Logged

"Sometimes, you just gotta say, 'OK, I still have nine live, two-headed animals' and move on.'' (owner of Coney Island freak show, upon learning he'd been outbid on a 5-legged puppy)